|
|
|
|
The Association for Equity in Funding, UA (AEF) is a group of state school districts that seeks financial equity in the state system of school financing. The members include large, urban districts such as Milwaukee, Green Bay, Appleton, Racine and Beloit, as well as small, rural districts, such as Algoma, Gilmanton, Tigerton and Weston. The two issues that brought this group together and have kept it together were the wide differences in the amount school districts were able to invest in the education of their children and the even wider differences in the property tax burden to pay for that investment. This 2003 Legislative Proposal addresses those issues.
In recent years two major state policy changes (revenue limits and 2/3 state funding) have been implemented. In addition the State Supreme Court has established a new educational standard which provides:
"Wisconsin students have a fundamental right to an equal opportunity to a sound basic educationÉthat will equip students for their roles as citizens and enable them to succeed economically and personally."
The Court also specified courses to be provided and required that "...districts with disproportionate numbers of disabled students, economically disadvantaged students, and students with limited English language skills..." be taken into account. The effect of this decision is to demand that the legislature revise our school finance system to assure that every child has an equal educational opportunity.
The obvious question is what has been the result of these policy changes and the new standard? The answers are disappointing.
Concerning revenue limits, some state officials claimed that per pupil spending differences would be narrowed because all districts would increase their spending by the same amount each year. AEF's analysis found that it would take more than 100 years for the lowest spending district to reach 90% of the per pupil amount in the highest spending district.
In absolute terms, the spending gap has widened since 1993-94 (first year of revenue limits). By 2001-02 the amount spent in the highest spending district had increased by $3,546 per pupil, which was 138% of the state average increase, and the increase in the lowest spending district was only 88% of the average. In 2001-02 the complete annual school cost per student ranged from $7,001 to $15,143 with an average of $9,227. Relatively, things are about the same as the lowest spending district in 2001-02 spent 46% of the amount spent in the highest spending district, up from 41% when revenue limits were adopted (see Table 1).
Table 1: Complete Annual School Costs (Changes from 1993-94 to 2001-02)
During the same period school tax burden differences have widened relatively. While school property tax rates declined when the state increased its aid levels, the formula distortions which accompanied the aid increase helped to keep the tax burden differences from narrowing. In 2001 property tax rates per thousand dollars of valuation ranged from $2.91 to $15.17 with a K-12 average of $10.04. The bottom line is that in the past nine years the tax rate in the lowest taxing district has declined 51%, or 7.1% more than the state average. And the highest taxing district now pays a tax rate of 521% of the lowest, up from 505% nine years ago (see Table 2).
Table 2: School Property Tax Rates (Changes from 1993-94 to 2001-02)
Concerning our new educational standard, nothing has changed. Neither the recently adopted state budget (2001-03) nor the budget repair bill addressed the standard and neither took the populations identified by the supreme court into account.
The result is a school funding system that does not provide an equal educational opportunity for our children; does not meet the additional needs of the three student populations identified in our new standard; and does not provide a fair and equitable school tax burden for property owners.
Regardless of the level of state aid, the continued reliance on local wealth means property-poor districts must continue to tax their residents at higher rates to obtain the same dollar amount for each pupil. Disequalizing state aid payments continue to increase.
Many school districts have disproportionately high numbers of children who need additional help such as children with disabilities, children from backgrounds of poverty or children of limited English proficiency. The recent Court decision requires that the legislature take these children and districts into account in our school finance system. To date, the needs of these populations have not been well or completely addressed.
In recognition of the continuing financial disparities among school districts and taxpayers along with the legislature's failure to address the elements of our new standard AEF will continue to narrow its legislative focus. This legislative proposal will attempt to accomplish the following two general goals in the school finance system:
(1) equal access to state and local revenues for all districts so that the cost of money to invest in K-12 education is the same for all children in all districts; and
(2) additional funds to meet the additional needs of the three student populations cited in our new standard on a continuing basis which takes account of the cost of serving those populations and inflation.
It is imperative that the current inequities be addressed so that all school districts in our state have the resources to provide an equal opportunity for a sound, basic education for their children. AEF believes that everyone in the state of Wisconsin -- those who know the importance of a good education as well as those who believe in fiscal responsibility -- will understand that these changes are appropriate and equitable for our children and taxpayers. |
